But going into the job, one of the tough decisions Quinn had to make was advocating for an increase in the state income tax. It wasn’t your typical campaign platform, especially in an election year dominated by jobs and the economy. And, as it turned out, a Republican tidal wave would sweep many safer Democrats with easier races, out of office. But that’s what we were faced with.

Knowing that executive offices are often won and lost on a candidate’s character and values, we drove that debate with a series of paid media spots against Brady, always posing the same question to voters: “Who is this guy?”

By tying each policy issue and legislative vote to Brady’s values and worldview, we were able to define him as someone voters should be uncomfortable with. The spot we crafted on Brady’s support to lower the minimum wage, for example, wasn’t just about lowering the minimum wage. It was about painting Brady as an out-of-touch multi-millionaire who doesn’t understand the struggles of everyday people. It was also about Brady’s values, demonstrating how he might look at other problems should he win the governor’s office.

Contrast that to our positive spots in the final weeks of the race. They were all about Quinn’s character and values. This was our trump card. Throughout his life Quinn has worked to earn his reputation as an honest leader who was never afraid to speak up and battle special interests on behalf of everyday men and women. In an age of cynicism, Quinn’s low-key authenticity and reputation as an honest leader proved a powerful weapon. Our positive spots tried to capture that essence and remind voters that this was the guy who fought as a reformer and consumer advocate on behalf of middle-class Illinois families for decades.

Yeah, OK. One problem: Quinn’s positive spots in the final weeks were direct copies of the ads he had already successfully used in the last weeks of the Democratic primary (”You know me,” and “Ford jobs”). Neither White nor Nuckels were around for that primary race.

* And this is just standard operating procedure for Illinois. You simply cannot win Illinois without the support of “persuadable” suburban women. Every gubernatorial candidate since Jim Edgar’s 1990 campaign who has won persuadable suburban women has also won the governor’s race. So, it didn’t take a genius to undermine Brady with that demographic…

Our first ad in the Chicago area highlighted Brady’s vote to allow guns in or near schools. But it wasn’t just about guns. It was also about what type of person would take such a vote. To the Democratic base, the spot was about a candidate who seemed extreme—a candidate who didn’t seem to care about homicide or violence in the city. On another level, the spot was about the fact that Brady had a very different set of cultural values.

We reprised a variation of this ad in the final five days of the campaign, defining Brady on his vote against a ban on the sale of guns to convicted spouse and child abusers. Among women in the Chicago area, this tested as the top reason to cast a vote against Brady last November. But we didn’t want to run the ad in the general market. Instead, we blitzed all of the women’s programming on cable networks throughout the Chicago media market in the final five days with no response from our opponent. It was especially effective with persuadable women voters in suburban Cook County and the surrounding suburban “collar” counties—voters any Republican statewide candidate needs to win over to be victorious.

* Throughout the summer, I was writing that the Quinn campaign was avoiding Downstate in order to concentrate on the Chicago market. I was told by the Quinn campaign that I was wrong. Now, they say I was right…

In many instances, we only bought cable in multiple downstate markets while our opponent was attacking us on broadcast television. We wanted to advertise more heavily in the Chicago area—where our voters lived.

We used innovative media strategy, blitzing women’s programming on Chicago cable stations in the final days, and targeting key African-American voters in downstate Illinois on cable programming. We didn’t run a heavy direct mail campaign in small communities.

They didn’t run a heavy direct mail campaign anywhere. And Personal PAC’s TV ads focusing on women’s programming and direct mail targeted at its huge contact list were more effective, in my opinion.

* They won, so they have an absolute right to gloat. Joe Slade White’s 1990s-style ads worked better than I thought they would. Nuckels came to the game a green, inexperienced kid, but did his job as well as Quinn would let him. Just about everybody had written Quinn off in the summer, but he came back to win. A victory lap is allowed by his advisors. A more accurate accounting would’ve been appreciated, however. [This post was originally cut off. Not sure why. I fixed it.]

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 10:00 am

Comments

John Kamis gets huge credit for his input into the primary You Know Me ad. John’s instincts were excellent - and were proven right on election night.

Biggest credit (or blame) for PQ’s victory should go to Terry Cosgrove and Personal PAC. What they did to BB in the suburbs was beyond a doubt the biggest impact on the election. As usual, Rich, you are correct.

The unions and Personal PAC won the race. When the campaign was floundering and WAY down, the unions and pro-choicers stepped in to save “their” Governor’s office in spite of its occupant. The “Who is this guy?” ads were effective, but only because Brady never did anything in the suburbs to soften himself and work on solidifying his image with suburban voters. They didn’t know him after the primary, and he made the mistake of letting that relationship status remain the same all the way to the election. That combined with AFSCME downstate and other unions dragged Quinn and his anemic campaign across the finish line kicking and screaming. And look what it got ‘em. Heh! Oh well… live and learn… unless you live in Illinois.

{This was our trump card. Throughout his life Quinn has worked to earn his reputation as an honest leader who was never afraid to speak up and battle special interests on behalf of everyday men and women.}

What we learned in reality is that the reputation was a false face, and that Harold Washington was right. This guy is a nit-wit; so much so to the point of being dangerous.

The real person to thank for Quinn’s victory is Michael J. Madigan, because he did nothing to kick Scott Lee Cohen off the ballot. This gave suburban voters an ‘out’ –an anti-Quinn who wasn’t Brady. Instead of smugly collecting accolades these guys should be thanking their lucky stars every day that Cohen stayed on the ballot.

This might be the dumbest thing I’ve ever read not written by John Kass. That’s saying something.

My favorite part, and it’s hard to pick just one, was either the part where they were brilliant because they waited until the end to go on TV or it’s the part where they were brilliant because they didn’t respond to Brady’s attacks.

Yeah, IIRC, women were VERY skeptical of Quinn, and the PP ad really painted Quinn as their only logical choice. Brady, OTOH, let it go down his leg by NOT hammering Quinn on economic issues - particularly with these same suburban women especially.

The article could be summed up more easily: “Let us tell you how awesome we are.”

I look at the last 10 years in the gop here, I think one of the great failings is the candidates and consultants have failed to find a way to get 55 percent in a statewide election. for all the bluster about corruption and taxes and spending and machines, the party has yet to have a serious discussion about how you run with an R after your name on your website statewide and win not just those suburban women voters but a build a solid statewide coalition. More than the 55,000th press release about some alderman’s 3rd cousin who got funny smelling contract, the state party and candidates would be well served going into 2014 to lock in on a fresher agenda-so that they don’t wake up the first wednesday in november saying they beat us by scaring women on guns or abortion again.

The main reason that Gov. Quinn won is the libertarian candidate, Lex Green. Quinn beat Brady by about 20,000 votes, and Green got about 34,000 votes. If Green didn’t run, the majority of his supporters would have voted for Brady, and Brady would have won.

Quinn won primarily because Dillard lost. That hard-right Brady could come so close to beating him speaks volumes. By a hair the Republicans chose the wrong candidate. And, the Governor’s certainly not helping his cause by flopping around and picking Blago-style initiatives to champion (repealing legislative scholarships is your top Veto Session priority, Governor? Seriously?!?! When we have 10% unemployment? Looks more like a Blagovian jab at the legislature than a serious attempt to better this state.).

Dillard, Mckenna, even Radogno, and a few others would have given Quinn a better run for the money. Even besides the campaign, Brady still has demonstrated no qualifications to be seriously considered for governor. I like and care about the GOP, but ever since Keyes, their candidate selection has been tragic.

Honestly how did he ever get so close?
Because of the perfect storm?
That, and Quinn’s White-Nukels amateur hour.
Quinn looked like a loser until all the votes were counted.
He was the incumbent and he ran like a chump.

An incumbent Democrat had to frontlash an extremist unpopular within the GOP in Illinois. And only carry Cook with no votes to spare?

I know I (and many many others) would have preferred a different candidate from BOTH major parties instead of the ones who ended up running against each other at the top of the state ticket. With the state our state is in, the pathetic 2010 gubernatorial race is nothing that either party, or either campaign, should be caught dead bragging about–now or ever. Maybe we can do better next time? Maybe?

While I don’t agree with everything in the article, only 2 of 30 polls taken had Quinn in the lead and a number had him down double digits. Numbers guru Nate Silver of the NY Times gave Quinn a 9% chance of winning a week before the election. They certainly deserve some credit.

The reason so many polls were so off the mark was because almost no pollster included all the candidates running, particularly Scott Lee Cohen. When SLC’s name was finally included, the polls instantly showed a much closer race.

And take a look around IL at our neighboring states that had Governor’s elections in 2010. Only Dayton was able to win in the Midwest. It was a Republican year and Quinn held on despite being for a tax increase during a recession.

I know he raised significant $$$ during his Southern Illinois bus tour, but Bill Brady should have lived in Chicago and the Collar Counties during the months of September and October. What the heck were he and his staff thinking? You can’t put a price on earned media and presence in an area where you are slated to do poorly.

Congratulations, boys, your candidate was nominally the tallest midget in the freak show. Agreeing that this race had such tight margins that Cohen and Green were both factors, and that Dillard could have trounced Quinn, but was dumped because he wasn’t ideologically extreme enough for the extreme wing of his party. Illinois republicans are an ouroboros; the snake that eats its own tail.

Brady was no Kirk or Dillard or Thompson - heck, he was more like another Keyes. Quinn was the freaking incumbent. In a state with no elected GOPers statewide. The President’s home. Deep blue. We are not Indiana or Kentucky or Iowa or Missouri.

It should not have been close.
The polls Quinn beat were bad polls.
And because he and White Nuckels ran a bad campaign too.

Those kids and volunteers who worked so hard at 676 and at Sixth street during the Primary and General, and the legion of and Democrats statewide and Labor is the reason Pat Quinn won. Ben Nuckles was just along for the ride.